Mark Shuttleworth is trying to entice OpenSUSE developers to join Ubuntu. "Novell's decision to go to great lengths to circumvent the patent framework clearly articulated in the GPL has sent shockwaves through the community. If you are an OpenSUSE developer who is concerned about the long term consequences of this pact, you may be interested in some of the events happening next week as part of the Ubuntu Open Week."

"Hey, they just put bittorrent links of Windows Vista ! they aren't distributing it, i swear! it's just Links"

It depends whether I link to the bittorrent files directly or only links to a site with bittorrent links. The latter one is perfectly legal in Denmark, while the first one (deep linking) is unclear. Sometimes people are convicted, but not always.

You won't go very far with this kind of defense. Don't try to circumvent the GPL. Putting this on the install CD and automagically installing it without having the user doing it all by himself is clearly illegal.

Nope, it is not illegal. Circumventing a license is not illegal per se. Putting non-GPL'ed code on a CD with GPL'ed code is perfectly legal, as long as the non-GPL'ed code doesn't link to the GPL'ed code. And since the .zip'ed driver doesn't link to anything it is perfectly legal to distribute and perform automatic unpacking and installation. It is clearly within the word of the GPL even if it is outside the spirit of the GPL (and it clearly is outside the spirit - but that is however irrelevant, since the GPL is technically not violated).

I can do anything with GPL'ed software as long as I don't distribute. On my own system I can link to anything I want to. The GPL kicks in when I distribute the software. The GPL is _not_ an EULA. It is merely a license and not a license _agreement_.

Distributing the nVidia driver in .zip'ed uninstalled format alongside the GPL'ed Linux kernel is perfectly legal since the linking is happening on _my_ machine. It is unlinked in distributed form and therefore perfectly legal according to the GPL.

As the GPL says in 2. (last paragraph): "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License."

Distributing the non-installed .zip'ed nVidia driver is merely aggregation of another work not based on the Program on the same medium as the Program.

"I can do anything with GPL'ed software as long as I don't distribute. On my own system I can link to anything I want to. The GPL kicks in when I distribute the software. The GPL is _not_ an EULA. It is merely a license and not a license _agreement_. "

You, as a user, you have the right to do that.

Ubuntu, as a distributor, don't have the right to link the kernel AND distribute it. We don't care if the "linking is happening on the machine". It's Ubuntu that did the work. It's like putting a bittorrent link to download vista on an Ubuntu setup automagically when it's installed and saying "it's happening on the User machine ! we did nothing. It's not ubuntu developers that download the vista torrent, it's them ! they are downloading it !".

Please, grow up. The world isn't as easy to f--k as you think it is.

"The latter one is perfectly legal in Denmark,"

Please, don't speak about denmark laws. We don't care. It's a very small country. It's not denmark that will decide the future of the linux desktop.
USA, Canada, England, Japan, France, Germany, and perhaps a little spice of China and India.

Denmark law doesn't count shit when we talk about developing software. Software developers will not make something just for this little, small, country, if the software is doing something illegal in the USA, Japan or France.
Come back when you know if this "latter one" is legal in the USA, France or Japan.

"Ubuntu, as a distributor, don't have the right to link the kernel AND distribute it."

The GPL is not invoked unless the distribution is lawfully considered more than mere aggregation. From the GPL text:

"In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License."

In my own interpretation, placing both on the install CD or in the distro's package manager is only mere aggregation.